Third Party & Independents Archives

Excellent, just goes to shows Joe don’t know jack when it comes to who really saved this nation from the Rapitalists that keep trying to take over our land.

I think how you view this particular article says a lot about you, I really do. What this article is emphasizing (other than unions, which can and should be part of a free market as long as they do not use force), is that we own everything to the government. The gloss it puts on things is very very interesting. For example, Joe’s dad is thankful to the social security established by the liberal, even though almost everyone acknowledges that if he had saved on his own, and invested in the market throughout the same time period (I would assume 1950 until 1990), he likely would have retired very well off, rather than just getting by (that is, on average, he and those like him would have been better off with the liberal’s paternalism). Or that if the government had not taxed him to support programs like low-interest student loans, he could have afforded to pay them with the money HE earned himself from his job (oh where oh where did the government get the money to finance all these super-great programs. That’s right, from Joe’s paycheck).
Also, it makes no mention of the fact that most business operate WELL above minimum regulation, because the free market dictates that if they do not, their workers will go elsewhere. It also does not mention that the drugs invented to keep Joe and his family alive have come primarily from the free market. I could go on, but the bias of this account is laughable to most anyone who takes a step back.
By the 1990s, most people have gotten over the delusion that the government is the efficient source of solution to most of our problems- the failure of government-centered regimes throughout the 20th century has made sure of that. Even Clinton declared the era of big government is over (so much for only republicans putting down big government- ha?). There are, to be sure, areas where the free market does not properly capture externalities of conduct (pollution is one, of course), and only in that limited sphere is government regulation justified.
Oh, and by the way, George W. Bush supports all of the programs you mentioned above and more. As far as I know he has not moved to abolish any of them- fear not, government-loving liberals, neither of these two candidates are going to dismantle the unconstitutional and anti-freedom big government apparatus that you worship as if it is the source of all goodness in the world… thankfully, most have at least granted that enough is enough, and we don’t really want more unconstitutional and anti-freedom growth in our federal government (as shown by the 1994 election in the face of tge socialized medicine plan)
One final thought- I could easily imagine a “conservative” article like this, in which Joe is walking around the street all safe and sound because the government has cracked down on civil liberties. It would also give credit to the government for stopping drugs from coming into his community, ignoring the fact that the drug war throws so many people in jail for no good reason. Its always easy to espouse your own view of how government power should abridge the rights of people to achieve your social-vision of how other people should live their lives. It is a much greater challenge to recognize that freedom may have some negative consequences, but that we should honor people’s choices on how they want to live their own lives nevertheless (as long as they are doing no harm to other people, that is). This is a challenge that both liberals and conservatives refuse to face.

You are fighting a straw man. It is also true that all the protections and luxuries Joe enjoys are the direct result of free market capitalism, which pays all the bills. You could write a similar story about Joe liberal’s dependence on big business. I recall the story about the parts of the body arguing about which was most important. The hands, feet, brain etc made their points, until the rectum just backed up and won the argument.

The dispute is not whether we should have government regulation, it is how much and what kind. The problem with regulations is that bureaucracies administer them and they continue in force long after the conditions that called them into being have changed and are sometimes inappropriately to new situations.

When government interferes too little you get the robber baron era. When it interferes too much you get North Korea. It is a trade off between efficiency and social needs. The goal is to find the point where the mix maximizes both. The best government creates conditions of prosperity but is almost transparent, so that the average Joe can take care of himself and his family, exercise reasonable self-control and stay out of other people’s business without feeling the government too often.

When a good leader governs, the people
are hardly aware that he exists.
Next best is a leader who is loved
Next, one who is feared
The worst is one who is despised.
If you don’t trust the people,
you make them untrustworthy.
The good leader doesn’t talk, he acts.
When his work is done,
the people say, “Amazing:
we did it, all by ourselves!”
Lao Tzu

I tried to find out who these authors actually were. I found the post on a number of liberal blogs, but I think I finally found the real source.

It’s on Michael Moore’s website, except that the author is somone named Michael Gray.

Now we all know that Mr. Moore always checks his facts and never stretches the truth so we’ll assume that Mr. Gray is the author. But that still leaves me with the question of who he really is. Unless, of course, Michael Gray is an alias for Michael Moore. Has anyone ever seen them in the same place at the same time?

In any case, this opinion piece is so one-sided that that I think it may have been planted by Kerry’s new hit squad — as part of a vast left-wing conspiracy.

And to think we owe it all to liberals, the saviours of mankind.

My, my, if Republicans had gotten their way we could be drinking dirty, filthy, poisoned water right now. Because we all know Republicans like their water poisoned.

Thankfully their diabolical scheme to rape the poor had been stopped by liberals or I could be living in a shack instead of a house. And Riding a bicycle to… my job? No, the unemployment office! Only to find that the Republican’s had cancelled my benefits out of pure spite.

Yes, I think you may be onto something there V. Without liberals holding my hand who would protect me from the evil republicans who want me poor and sick and probably dead too?

Why, I heard this nice liberal man tell me just yesterday, that if the evil republicans aren’t voted out of office soon I may not be able to breath anymore, because Republicans want dirty air.

If only liberals could take care of me always. I’d never have to worry about anything! Why I even heard they want me to get money for not working. I was worried about my employment but now I know that the liberals will take care of me no matter what.

Please see the story, new and improved

Joe gets up at 6:00 AM to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot with good, clean drinking water because the market economy has produced the technology and organizations to give it to him. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe and effective because of innovations by “Big pharma”.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employer’s medical plan. It might cost less if malpractice and frivolous lawsuits were abated. . He prepares his morning breakfast — bacon and eggs this day. Joe has bacon and eggs at a price he can afford because of the efficiency of American agribusiness.

Joe takes his morning shower, reaching for his shampoo, brought to him in exactly the varieties he wants by the good folks at Proctor and Gamble. If he drops it, the bottle won’t break dangerously because the plastics industry has developed a cheap way to replace glass bottles.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because technological innovation has allowed energy to be produced with much less pollution per unit. He remembers the visit he made to E. Europe when Communists ran them. He has never seen any pollution like that anywhere in the U.S. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. He lives in a nice house in the suburbs despite that some liberal fought to zone his type of housing out of the neighborhood to keep him in a denser city environment for social reasons.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because he has learned a useful skill rewarded by the market economy that has produced enough surplus to allow for high wages and leisure. Joe’s employer meets standards because Joe’s employer he depends on their productivity and good work and doesn’t want his employees to form a union, which would probably lead his small firm to bankruptcy. Joe’s chances of getting hurt on the job are much lower because his firm has enjoyed enough profits to buy newer, safer and cleaner equipment..

It’s noontime. Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. This is now much easier because of Internet banking and ATMs. Unions fought these innovations in the name of job preservation, but fortunately they lost. Joe also has a lot more options to invest his money, now the government regulations have moderated. Joe has to pay his low rate mortgage. Housing is inexpensive in the U.S. because of innovations in building techniques and modularization techniques. These techniques are unavailable in more “worker friendly” nations in Europe because Unions and governments have stopped them cold, so workers sometimes pay twice as much per square meter.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is among the safest in the world because of safety innovation such as anti-lock breaks invented by the auto industry. Since he uses his seat belt, he doesn’t really need the government mandated airbags, which add a couple hundred dollars to the cost of his car and are actually dangerous to children and small adults. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because his family has managed to get others to subsidize their rural lifestyle at significant economic and environmental cost.
Joe is happy to see his dad, who is now retired.

Joe’s dad struggles on Social Security and his inadequate union pension because some liberal convinced him that he didn’t have to plan for his own retirement. After his visit with dad, Joe gets back in his car for the ride home. He turns on a radio talk show. The host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good.

Jack- have you ever considered that the “record profits” that the insurance companies are enjoying have something to do with the rising premiums? Insurance companies nowadays are tighter than ever, and to get affordable coverage, one has to go for a plan with a monstrously sized deductable.

Congratulations, with your purely free market system, you’ve ensured that the only people who benefit from insurance are the executives, and the customers who don’t really need it!

Jack,
Liberals aint bad people, nor are unions, they have just been fed a “lemming” sandwich for 30 yrs.
If you took a poll of liberals-v- republicans, you would find that republicans buy American cars and trucks 3-1.
Which party really supports American auto workers ??

I really do not think we need to look at this as a left or right issue. I—believe it or not—am a strong proponent of the free-market system just as long as it is held in reasonable check by regulation that places the needs of society above the needs of business. The free-market if left on its own will destroy a society; blame it on greed, one of the even deadly sins. And conversely, liberalism if left uncheck will do harm to society as well. We need a comfortable middle ground fosters that the free-market spirit, while ensuring the cause of society is served. It does not have to be either or.

As far as the retirement investment accounts are concern. You should ask my associate what he thinks; his 401K has gone from a being in the black by a substantial margin to running considerable in the red for the last two years. And my own 401K is swimming in red ink! As a consequence he has pushed back his retirement indefinitely…again a middle ground must be struck. Why not keep SSN, but cap individual contributions to say 3%. The remaining 4% (I believe the overall FICA rate is 7% per year) can be invested by the individual in whatever investment vehicle they choose. Middle ground.

Thanks you to both V. Ed and to Jack for presenting the two vastly different viewpoints. Of course, either side without the other would lead to a more defined situation, which would not be the best of both worlds.

The real question is how for to one side or the other do we want the pendulum to swing. That is the difference between libs and cons.

V. Ed.: sounds like you are okay with privatizing a portion of Social Security, but not all of it. Isnt that precisely what Republicans are calling for, and what Democrats are fighting?

We are all in favor of some middle ground. It depends on where we want to draw the lines. Without “liberal” redistribution we might face social breakdowns. Without free market capitalism, there wouldn’t be enough goods available to be worth redistributing.

We Americans have become so wealthy that we sometimes forget where wealth comes from or how it is created and distributed. (I know I will get a “what about the poor?” In pre-capitalist societies, poverty means starvation onto death. Who would have believed that obesity related complaints would a big problem among the poor?) Our prosperous society was created neither by market capitalism nor by liberal policies, but by the dynamic tension between them. Few of us want the free market of the robber barons and nobody wants the rule by government fiat a la North Korea. Sensible compromises have to be hammered out by give and take. My concern is that we are losing respect for the other side. When I hear people claim that they will leave the country their candidate doesn’t win the election … well, if their respect for the opinions of their fellow citizens is so low maybe those guys should seek their utopias on brighter shores. But they are wrong.

Joe—

…if it is, then I applaud them. I am not a Democrat, but if they are fighting this particular rendition then they need to check themselves. I do believe in choice within reason, tempered by compassion, reality, and common sense…

Joe Republican/Democrat/Independent lives better today not because a liberal or conservative gave them safer working conditions, a higher standard of living, or money in their back pocket. For here in America these changes came when the majority of the poor and middle class has threatened the rich with total society breakdown. Sometimes through violence, sometimes through peaceful protest the citizens have combined their forces to bring about changes in labor, women voting rights, civil rights, and education.

The only difference between the Republicans and Democrats today is one believes in pure rapitalism and one believes in pure capitalism. The difference; rapitalism believes that the almighty dollar wins out no matter what the cost to society (race to the bottom theory) and capitalism believes as we all live in a society and communities than we all should share the wealth (Socialism).

But who is right and who is wrong? Both parties miss the boat on this answer. Playing the current economic game “The one with the most toys at the end wins” means everybody loses. For all one has to do is to get all the toys be any means necessary and they win. Hence War and no one will ever let that happen. Although it may have been a good idea in the Cold War, it actually threatens America in the War on Terror. For if a foriegn country gets all the toys and manages to hold on to them than we’re in deep trouble. Just think what would happen if UBL and company got a hold of the oil fields.

However, the idea of pure socialism in America just goes against everything that we stand for. This country was founded on the ability of men to work from sun up to sun down. The idea that anyone can get something for nothing was the worst mistake our fathers made back in the sixties.

So where does leave Joe R/D/I, like everybody else on the planet Joe and his family require the basic elements of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. I think every American can agree on that. But the rich say there isn’t enough money in the world to allow that to happen based on gold and precise stones. Yet, to most of us Americans all that fancy stuff is just fun to own. Really now, if I can’t eat, shot it, or (I leave that your imagination) it than what good is it. Isn’t that really why we are off the gold system.

Back to Joe R/D/I; Given the reasons above and the ability of the American people, I say we design an economy for the 21st Century. Now, I’m not crazy enough to think I could layout a plan here, but lets face some facts about our government. HUD, Housing and Urban Development has set the standard of living in Americaat 30% of income.Therefore, by defualt everything in our economy is tied to that figure. Plus, considering the average monthly household expense in the country is about $800.00 The minmum wage in America should be about $40,000.00/yr. if I’m doing may math right. However, can anyone explain to me why our Congress has set it so low? I mean the 30% standard was set way long ago. I think that we can do better than that.

Think about it, the faster everyone gets there the more money everyone can make. Plus we get the added bonus of taking care of the social and environmental problems since we finally have the knowledge to know what needs to be done. Now I’m no econmic major, but you can’t tell me that as Americans we can’t do it. So lets here some ideas. How would you structure a new economy? But keep in mind it must be globe.

Plus, considering the average monthly household expense in the country is about $800.00 The minmum wage in America should be about $40,000.00/yr. if I’m doing may math right. However, can anyone explain to me why our Congress has set it so low? I mean the 30% standard was set way long ago. I think that we can do better than that.

Sure, why not? In fact if 40K is good then why not make it 80K which would be twice as good?

The idea that anyone can get something for nothing was the worst mistake our fathers made back in the sixties.

My father must have lived in a different 60s. The day I turned 16, he went out and got me a real job: 35 hrs./week, plus school and homework.

Misha, you’re still wrong about people being better off without Social Security. Obviously you weren’t alive before we had that great boon, but maybe some of your relatives remember how bad it was. There are some people who would do better, but there are many, many more who wouldn’t. SS provides a basic safety net for everyone. You could make a good argument for partial privatization or even a 401(k) type system with some guarantees, but abolishing it would be a disaster.

It looks like there’s some consensus on the pendulum idea. I know moderate Republicans don’t want to completely abolish social safety net programs. Maybe you guys should stop voting for ultra-conservative politicians who do.

AP- the numbers on SS dont lie. The only way the overwhelming majority of people dont do better if they choose, of their own freedom, not to invest (the number whose investments would fail if they diversified would be far far outweighed by those who would do better than the 30 cents on the dollar they get from social security today). Just like I am willing to allow someone to be free to destroy their lives with drugs, boos and cigs, I am willing to let them destroy their retirement by spending away the money they learned. I believe in freedom, even if people will make choice with that freedom that are think are stupid and irresponsible.

Also, bush is hardly ultra-conservative on this- he is like you guys. You should see what true libertarians on these issues think of Bush- I think people have lost perspective as to how moderate (read: wrong) he is on these issues.

Finally, none of my family will remember what it was like before social security because they were living under a system that is the logical consequence of thinking the government is the solution to all of the world’s problems (we came here from the soviet union in 1988).

The day I turned 14 I went out and got my own job.
He who dies with the most toys, is still dead.

What the extremists from both sides don’t seem to realize is the center is the best way for all.
Those on the right feel the centrists can’t make a commitment. Those on the left feel that anything right of left is totalitarian.
I belive I am capable of making my own decisions. By the same token, I am capable of making my own mistakes. I don’t need to be protected cradle to grave.
Without mistakes I can’t learn.

The only way the overwhelming majority of people dont do better if they choose, of their own freedom, not to invest

Or they make bad investments, or the market collapses. SS is guaranteed.

I believe in freedom, even if people will make choice with that freedom that are think are stupid and irresponsible.

I know you do Misha, that’s why I like you. :)

I believe that’s a good system for responsible people. If you want to set up a voluntary libertarian utopia in Connecticut, or wherever it is you guys are infiltrating, more power to you. Unfortunately, there are a lot of irresponsible people in the world, and misfortunes happen.

My conscience doesn’t allow me to watch people suffer and not be moved to action on their behalf because they are “stupid and irresponsible”, or just bad investors.

I don’t know about the rest of the “left” Rocky, but Democrats aren’t proposing that the government run people’s lives.

We feel that health care should be affordable and available to everyone, that all American citizens should have equal opportunities, and that a reasonable social safety net is something every citizen should be able to rely upon. Think of it as Christian charity on a nation-wide scale.

Liberals aint bad people, nor are unions, they have just been fed a “lemming” sandwich for 30 yrs. If you took a poll of liberals-v- republicans, you would find that republicans buy American cars and trucks 3-1. Which party really supports American auto workers ??

That’s freakin hilarious, Beagle. Support American business? What about the free market economy? A level playing field? Maybe in your example liberals are more American by buying the better product rather than using protectionist economic policy to protect lazy corporations who want to maximize revenue from the status quo.

AP:

My conscience doesn’t allow me to watch people suffer and not be moved to action on their behalf because they are “stupid and irresponsible”, or just bad investors.

In that case, I’d like to admit my stupidity and irresponsibility in spending all my money rather than saving any of it. I regret to say that it has not been any degree of misfortune at all, but rather, just my own stupidity and greediness.

I know now that my wasteful spending on cable TV, a waverunner, a snowmobile and a hot car, in addition to the many trips to the bar wont alter your Christian compassion for me. I also don’t like to cook (too much hassle) so I usually just go out for dinner or order in. As a result, I am now experiencing financial instability, otherwise known as “being broke”.

Therefore I am looking forward to you being moved to action on my behalf.

Which is better for you to send….cash, check or credit card number (dont worry, I’ll only use your card once).

Thank you thank you thank you. :)

AP-
a couple of problems-

(1) I am glad you feel that way about people, I really am. Personally, I am more concerned with people who are suffering much more than the American poor (say, starving people in Africa or the Ukraine). That is why as soon as I get my first paycheck next summer (which is gonna be far more than I need), i am gonna donate to a charity that helps them (so far, all I have been able to afford to donate is my megear poker winnings). If the government didnt take so much money from me for the charity programs that the majority wants, i would have been able to donate more.

Thats the thing about freedom- we can choose what causes we beleive in and then give money to those causes. From your post, I take it that you are very concerned for the poor, elderly in America- that is very noble. Instead of having the government take your money (AND my money) and givung it to them, find a good charity and give yourself- but let me choose to whom I want to give my money.

(2) “Or they make bad investments, or the market collapses. SS is guaranteed.”

Yes, sometimes people will make bad investments. But the people who are made worse off from that will be more than balanced out by those who invest average or better than average, and thus end up with far better retirements than SS can ever provide. Also, social security isnt looking too garanteed for my generation. If someone were to ask me: “which is more likely to not go broke- a low-risk, low yield portofilio of invests or government run SS?” I would take the porfolio 7 days a week. wouldnt you? I would much rather trust my ability to invest my money than trust the government to do the same for me…

(3) “Think of it as Christian charity on a nation-wide scale.”

Thats a very good way to put it. Fortunately, we have a seperation between church and state in our country, and I do not like the majority enforcing their christian charity world-view on me. Just like you wouldnt want them imposing their christianity on you in areas like gay marriage ect. ect.

I really do think that people like AP have their heart in a good place. My point is that even if you see the ends as moral and good, the means are not acceptable. Let people live their lives- and if you think they ought to have some help, give to the appropriate charity.

NOTOTH, you asked why not 80. Would you settle for the standard of living ne lowered? Facts area facts, you can not change them. What you may not know is the fact that for a family of four in most cities $42,000.00/yr is still considered low income. Check out your local government HUD report, this yearly report shows just how far out of line the lending indusrty is to the local wages paid. Haven’t you realized that the average person is getting up to $10,000.00 free to buy a home?

AP, your dad must of lived in the country because apparently you never heard of Urban Redevelopment, Housing Projects, and the whole list of social programs which have their roots from that era.

And yes you may have got a job at 16, I started making my own money about 10 by mowing yards. However, you and me are not the norm of society. Ask yourself this, how many other kids did not have jobs at that age?

Misha, you said that you would allow everyone the free will to destory their retirement, yet no one has control over world events that effect the market. For stupidity and irresponsiblity, are you saying that just because you don’t know I can take advantage of you? The facts are that most (95+%) of us do not have the knowledge needed to make good investments without help. Under the current buyer beware system, your financial advisor doesn’t have to make you a dime. Yet, would you hire one that can’t make you atleast 7% return on your investments? Thats why any retirement/savings program needs to be heavily regulated until we get to the point were the vast mojority understand why the price of eggs in China effect what and how you live your life.

Rocky, I agree that a centralist stance on this issue is the best for Joe R/D/I. Yet, do you believe the left and right extremist would agree to an economic system that allows the knowledge of investments to be learned by everyone? Wouldn’t Joe’s productivity be greatly reduced if he had to spend the time necessary to make smart investments?

JBD, No! I won’t send you money, but I also won’t let AP take all your money by selling you a bill of goods.

Yes, human nature tells us that we are all idiots sometimes. In fact, many people do dumb things two or three times a day. Does this mean we just keep letting them or do you agree we need to start handing out degrees in common sense. I just wonder how many so called Masters and PHD’s would past the test?

Henry- go to google, type in “low risk mutual fund.” Invest in a money market or something else and you almost assured to do better than social security. Thats why they have mutual funds, so you dont have to watch every little thing- and the more reputable ones well overperform social security and there is no reason to believe that this will end (at least MUCH less reason than to believe that social security could go under).

Is it too much to ask that people take even a little bit of responsibility for their retirement by doing a couple of hours (or maybe even a weekend or two!) of research? i certainly dont think its too much.

Misha, I agree with your idea and have had to learn what I know on my own. However, while I’m not sure of the latest stats in the 90’s it was common knowledge that 70% of Americans had trouble balancing their checkbook. Thats not showing much better today and why not pass regulations that require financial advisors to produce a 7% return on retirement accounts. Don’t we require doctors, lawyers, and such to be certified in their field and hold them responsible for their actions and advice.

I don’t know about the rest of the “left” Rocky, but Democrats aren’t proposing that the government run people’s lives.

AP,
Every time a law is created that takes away my ability to think for myself Democrats are proposing to run my life.
Laws are passed to protect the lowest common denominator. In other words to protect the dumbest of us from ourselves.
As a thinking person I don’t need those type of laws. If common sense prevailed, easily 25 to 30 percent of these laws would not have been passed.

Misha before you try to convince naive folks to risk it all, please read the following:

Speech by SEC Commissioner: Mutual Fund Performance Advertising: Is It in Overdrive?

Remarks by
Commissioner Paul R. Carey
U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission

At SEC Speaks

March 2, 2001

I would like to talk to you today about mutual fund performance advertising. I remind you that the views I express are mine and mine alone and are not meant to reflect the views of the Commission or its staff.

Recently, I was reading the Wall Street Journal and a mutual fund advertisement caught my eye. This advertisement showcased the absolutely spectacular performance of a fund. Funny thing, though, this fund was in a sector that even the most casual market observer knew had taken a sharp downturn. Could it be that this fund was managed by a veritable stock picking genius who somehow managed to maintain high performance in the face of market declines? Upon closer inspection of the ad, I realized that the fund performance highlighted was calculated as of a date two months earlier, before the market had taken the sharp downturn. I later found out that the fund’s one-year performance as of the date of the ad was significantly lower. In fact, the fund’s more current one-year performance was negative. Clearly, an investor could be misled by this advertisement.

And this devastating analysis:

The contrast is stunning. At 16% turnover, a $1 billion fund sells $160 million of stocks in a given year and then reinvests the $160 million in other stocks, $320 million in all. At 110%, a $1 billion fund sells and then buys a total of $2.2 billion of stocks each year—nearly seven times as much. Even with lower unit transaction costs, it’s hard to imagine that such turnover levels aren’t a major drain on shareholder assets.

Let me be clear: If a six-year holding period can be characterized as long-term investment and if an eleven-month holding period can be characterized as short-term speculation, mutual fund managers today are not investors. We are speculators. When I say that this industry has moved from investment to speculation, I do not use the word “speculation” lightly. Indeed, in my thesis I used Lord Keynes’ terminology, contrasting speculation (“forecasting the psychology of the market”) with enterprise (“forecasting the prospective yield of an asset”). I concluded that as funds grew they would move away from speculation and toward enterprise (which I called “investment”), focusing, not on the price of the share, but on the value of the corporation. As a result, I concluded, fund managers would supply the stock market “with a demand for securities that is steady, sophisticated, enlightened, and analytic.” I was dead wrong. We are no longer stock owners. We are stock traders, as far away as we can possibly be from investing for investment icon Warren Buffett’s favorite holding period: Forever.
Remarks by John C. Bogle
Founder and Former Chairman, The Vanguard Group
Before the Harvard Club of Boston,
the Harvard Business School Association of Boston,
and the Boston Security Analysts Society
Boston, Massachusetts
January 14, 2003

The above whole article is very very enlightening regarding mutual funds. And no, most Americans will not want to invest their retirement in mutual funds. Not with the national debt growing the way it is. The national debt portends doom for mutual fund investors who invest in the long term.

Rocky,
I agree with you about to many laws. I can actually read and understand the U.S. Code and how the Rules and Regulations are done.

Sad, but true. Did you know for every law made one of us humans someone have had to do it or get caught at it? I’m not saying we are all dumb, but everyone does something dumb once in a while.

What I think we need in our education system is a Degree in Common Sense. I wonder how many specialist PHD’s and Masters would pass it?

Did you know the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1830’s-40’s that any layman who has not had any schooling in Law and/or Criminal Justice has the right ask the judge to let him defend himself using common sense. However, there is a catch to this law. You have to prove you have common sense and common knowledge of the law to be able to do it. Common sense: Using laws, logic, and knowledge to come up with a reasonable working explanation to prove your right. Sounds like fun to me considering we have been doing it to our parents and kids for the last 40 years.

David, thanks for the information on mutual funds. That is why I said Congress needs to create special notes so we can invest in them. This would allow us to hold businesses and the government in check for their action. Sort of evens the playing field doesn’t it.

7.3 million plus last night was what I saw the national debt. Fast figure: Every worker in America would have to buy about $5,000.00 dollars worth per year for the next 10 years. Total National Debt: 45 trillion; about $30,000.00/every worker for ten years.

Question, Do the poor and middle class have to lend more money to the rich so they can give it back? Taxes vs. Investing in our country as a whole makes better since to me. It sure beats killing myself having to make a dollar.

Henry, unfortunately, what we need right now is some uncommon sense. Particuly from our leaders.

But the people who are made worse off from that will be more than balanced out by those who invest average or better than average, and thus end up with far better retirements than SS can ever provide.

Come on Misha! You don’t think that’s a little cold? I suspect that, because we have a social safety net, you don’t realize how bad “worse off” is.

We don’t have debtor’s prisons anymore. We’re able to put our grandkids into school, rather than putting them to work in full-time unskilled labor jobs so they can help keep a roof over grandma’s head and food in her belly.

Seriously, Misha. Think Dickens. We didn’t institute Social Security because we were sitting around bored one night. It solves a very real problem.

Rocky,
It’s not uncommon sense that America needs. It’s the fact that common sense has become uncommon. How is it acceptable that the political leaders of our country have over 8,000 years of education, but not the common sense to “touch their nose?”

Food for thought: As babies we all learn to do the complicated math that allows to touch our nose, yet as adults most of us have trouble finding solutions to sovling simple problems. Commom sense we have by brith right than could it be we teach it out of are kids through our education system.

Henry I would differ with you on the point. I refer to “un”common sense. What this country needs is a leader that doesn’t lead from behind. By that, I mean someone that has the sense to make the right decissions, and can be non-partisan. To do the best for America and the world we lead. To stay away from the special interests from the right and the left that would ruin this country. Someone that doesn’t grouse in defeat, and doesn’t crow in victory. These are the qualities of greatness

But thats whats opinion polls are for! Just Joking. I agree those are great qualities in a leader. Plus, if I may add are hard to find. For someone once said “It’s lonely at the top,” because even doing right means sometimes being wrong. Not wrong by god or man, but to those who would have us to believe it’s better to be popular than to disobey the masses opinion. Maybe that is why the word assume(ass-u-me) was invented.

Henry if you don’t allow yourself to make mistakes, you will never gain the knowledge from making them. That which doesn’t kill you will make you stronger.

Rocky, I’m not asking for perfection. However, from our leaders we should demand that they strive to be right 99.9% of the time, instead of what we have now. I don’t want to say that the moral and ethnics in congress now is as low as it was in the 70’s, but if the shoe fits!

You quote correctlly, yet man being made in god’s image is not perfect by nature. Funny thing is I can not find anywhere in the bible that god says he is or should we be. The very nature of free will means we are going to make mistakes. Kind of strange you never hear a preecher talk about that.

Henry, One of the reasons we have three branches of government is because men are falible. This is also why it is imperitive that no branch (see Presidential), gains more power to run the country than the others. Corruption has been the bane of man’s existence. If you don’t have evil you will neither recognize or accept good.

Rocky, I agree. That is one of the reasons I wrote the answer to the song Monster. The biggest, most fearful evil any man or woman will ever face is their “Self.” For as much good that is in man there exist an equal amount of evil. The freewill of the person makes the difference. A parenr can teach honor, diginty, and morals to a child until about 10. After that a parent can only pray.

Joe gets up at 5/a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because it comes from a well Joe’s father dug by hand with no help from any liberal weenies. Joe wants to dig another well on some property he owns. But some idiot liberals made it a regulation to require a permit, environmental impact study, and a licensed well-driller. This would cost Joe about $20,000.00 to do what Joe’s dad did with a $2.00 shovel and a strong back.

As Joe gets ready for work, he notices his calendar on the wall. Joe put a note on May 15th. Joe figures this is the date that he will finally get to keep some of his income. Joe has worked through January, February, March, April, and part of May just to pay all the taxes a bunch of twinkle-toed liberals and RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) have extorted from him to pay for a myriad if government freebie programs. Joe is getting really tired of supporting freeloaders who refuse to work. Unlike most people educated in the liberal public fool system, Joe can do math! Joe has figured out that the total amount of state and federal income taxes withheld by government is almost exactly equal to the dollar amount of liberal unconstitutional income-transfer programs. That is, if programs like: Welfare, Medicaid, Farm Subsidies, CRP, SSI, SSD, Section 8 Housing, Food Stamps, PELL grants, etc, were stopped, Joe would not pay ANY income taxes. The government could run all constitutionally allowable things, like National Defense, using constitutional taxes like, import duties and excise taxes. And if Joe could keep his own money, he could easily send his kids and grandkids through college without any liberal subsidies.

Joe AMERICAN prepares his morning breakfast of bacon and eggs. Joe’s bacon and eggs are safe to eat because Joe raised the hog and the chickens on his own land. And Joe slaughtered the hog himself. Unfortunately some yuppy-liberal-tree-hugging-enviromentalist-commies, have recently built HUGE NEW ENERGY-SUCKING houses near Joe. These commie-liberal-tree-hugging-animal-worshipers have been complaining to the Township Trustees and County Commissioners, about Joe’s hogs and chickens. Not only do they think it is "cruel" and "stinky" to raise animals in a pen, but when they saw Joe butchering a hog, they freaked. (It’s OK to get your pork in plastic wrapped packages at the grocery store, but Gaia forbid you would do it yourself.) Although Joe’s family has been raising farm animals on this land since the 1850’s, some godless-liberal-pinkos have got themselves elected to local offices, and may well pass an ordinance against Joe’s inalienable right to farm. These godless liberal tree-huggers have already passed an ordinance against the local Amish leaving "horse apples" in the road when riding in their buggies, something they have done in this area since the 1700’s. These big-government idiot liberals have required the Amish to put "horse diapers" on their horses while in town, they don’t want to hit horse apples with their BMW’s.

As Joe AMERICAN gets ready for work, he telephones a local assisted living center, to let them know he plans to visit after work. Joe’s 14-year-old daughter, Angela, has been in the center recovering from her abortion. You see in 1973, some godless liberal activist judges declared: any woman can have an abortion; for any reason; at anytime. Legislating from the bench, these godless liberals said that abortion does not require parental consent, or even parental knowledge. Angela went to see the school nurse about her secret pregnancy. While Joe thought she was studying the three R’s, the school nurse took Angela to a Planned Parenthood clinic. There she got a "safe and legal" abortion. Angela came home on the school bus as usual. She said she wasn’t feeling well and went to her room to lie down. Joe found his daughter at dinnertime, face down in her room. Joe called rescue, but not knowing about the abortion had no idea what was wrong. Finally, a friend of Angela’s, who was checking up on her, told the hospital about the abortion. By this time, Angela was in a coma, caused by septic shock and a perforated uterus. Now, Angela just sits and rocks in her chair, she may learn to feed herself again someday.

As Joe AMERICAN arrives at work, he finds the gate to the machine shop locked, and a security guard trying to calm a group of his co-workers. It seems the kind of work Joe does, has all been out-sourced to Mexico and Communist China. During Clinton’s communist regime, the flaming card-carrying liberals and the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) in Congress passed NAFTA and GATT. And, like Ross Perot said, that giant sucking sound you heard was all our jobs going south of the border and overseas.

Well, things could be worse Joe reasons; unemployment is not the end of the world. Joe goes down to the Union office to cash in his pension and deferred comp. Joe never cared for their liberal policies and political endorsements, but at least the Union was good for something. But Joe finds the Union office cleaned out and locked up. It seems the godless thieving liberal Union mucky mucks got some advance warning, and absconded with all the pension funds.

Not to be defeated, Joe AMERICAN decides to start his own home-based business. Joe has his own little machine shop in his barn. That with 25 years experience, Joe figures he can make parts for some niche markets. Joe lands a couple of nice little contracts and is off to a good start. Joe soon adds a new lathe, a screw machine, and employs a couple of his formerly unemployed co-workers—just in time to save their homes from foreclosure. But the liberal big-government t**d-sucking Trustees and County Commissioners stop by to see Joe. They say Joe’s land is not zoned for industry. They want to see Joe’s permits and licenses. They want to know where his metal shavings go and, if he has filed all the proper tax forms. They say he has to shutdown his shop. As the liberal t**d-sucking commies talk, Joe begins to feel surrounded. Joe begins to feel allot like he did during a different encounter with commies in 1971 near Da Nang. Joe begins to get tunnel vision, and Joe’s training kicks in. He can hear the CO shouting. He can hear the choppers coming in for a dust off. He can smell the Napalm. In the blink of an eye, Joe adds 3 more liberals to his body count. BETTER DEAD THAN RED Joe says. Now Joe is on a mission, and will soon rid his county of the Red Liberal Menace.

David Bonnette, sounds like your Joe needs a shrink before he gets arrested for murder. So much for good old conservative self responsibility - you now want to lay right wing acts of criminality at the feet of liberals - “the liberals made me do it” won’t make much of a defense in a murder trial, thank goodness. Afterall, this is still America and the right have not yet taken over the judiciary, not yet!